From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754568AbZDOXor (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Apr 2009 19:44:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752661AbZDOXoi (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Apr 2009 19:44:38 -0400 Received: from pfepa.post.tele.dk ([195.41.46.235]:43779 "EHLO pfepa.post.tele.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752524AbZDOXoh (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Apr 2009 19:44:37 -0400 Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 01:46:42 +0200 From: Sam Ravnborg To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: Gregory Haskins , Randy Dunlap , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, henrix@sapo.pt Subject: Re: Trouble with make-install from a NFS mount Message-ID: <20090415234642.GA28531@uranus.ravnborg.org> References: <49E500F6.8060401@novell.com> <49E501D4.6000605@oracle.com> <49E627AA.5080105@novell.com> <49E641D4.2000604@oracle.com> <49E64DE1.8070909@novell.com> <20090415212009.GA27597@uranus.ravnborg.org> <49E651A9.8030409@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <49E651A9.8030409@zytor.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 02:29:13PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Sam Ravnborg wrote: > >>The problem seems to be that 30-rcX thinks that there are dependencies > >>to update (such as include/config/kernel.release and version.h.tmp) > >>during a make-install operation. Since I am on a root-squashed NFS > >>mount, these files cannot be updated and thus the install fails. > >>Previous trees prior to linux-current (at least up to 2.6.29) did not > >>try to update these files so the install would succeed. > > > >It is because arch/x86/Makefile has > >a dependency on vmlinux for the install target. > > > >I know hpa has had a fix for it but it is not applied. > >I recall there was a trivial bug in the first version. > > > > OK, do we have a consensus that this is desirable? I was somewhat > confused if it was desired or considered user error. It is desireable - so please go ahead and fix the patch. Thanks, Sam